Skip to main content

Full text of "The Right Reverend Richard Channing Moore, D. D., second bishop of Virginia, and the beginnings of the Theological Seminary in Virginia; an address delivered at the Alumni meeting of the Virginia Theological Seminary, on June 4th, 1914"

See other formats






^H ^ 

^^^= ^ ^Bbh^E 


" — <~^ I^^HrSB 

^^M ^ 


^^H 1 

_ -< ^^^^bI^R 



^H ^ 









>ll\ttf)artr Cfjanning jMoore, 

B.B., anb Clje peginningss of tfie 
Cfjeological ^eminarp in "Virginia 

Pp Eeberentr ?!Sam. ^, 3^, (HoobtDin, p.B. 

The Right Ri:vi:hi:xi) 
Richard Chanmng Mookk, D, D. 

Ci)c Eigljt Eefaerenb 

^icljartr Cfjannmg Jloore, B.3B. 

Second Bishop of Virginia 


®f)e peginningsi of tfte ^fteological 
^eminarp in "Virginia 



An Address Delivered at the Alumni Meeting of the 
Virginia Theological Seminary, on June 4th, 1914. 


met). aHm. a. E. (goolitom, P. li. 

Pi^lished by Order of the Alumni Association 






I. The Rt. Rev. Richard Channig Moore, D. D 7 

II. The Reginning of the Theological Seminary in 

Virginia 40 

III. The Rt. Rev. William Cabell Rrown, D. D 45 





l^iUiam Cabell iBroUin, ®, B. 

Bishop Coadjutor 
OF THE Diocese of Virginia 

iSisftop Moovt 

History finds its best intcrj)retati()n in the biographies 
of epoch making men. In them we see the forces of the 
past put to test, the forces of their contemporaneous life 
struggling for the mastery, and the creative spirit which 
is prophetic of the future made incarnate. In order to 
know a man we must know the past out of which he came, 
the conditions under which he lived, and the influence of 
his life upon the future; for life is the spirit of the past 
flowing through the soul of man into the future, but ever 
meeting in the soul of man tlie great vital and creative 
forces of an eternal Spirit world, which are incarnate 
there, to transform and enrich the spirit of the past, as it 
flows through the souls of men, in order that days that are 
to be may be better than the days that have been. From 
those lives which have exerted this transforming influence 
we are called of God to get inspiration, for they are the 
witnesses of the presence of His creative Spirit dwelling 
in men ever making all things new. Thus the past is 
transformed through the God filled present into the better 
future, and thus His Kingdom comes. 

A study of the past which lies back of a man is es- 
sential to the understanding of the man himself, because 
the past creates the obstacles which he is called to over- 
come, furnishes the challenge to his spirit, creates the 
material upon which he has to make his impress, and tests 
his courage and tries his faith. A man's power to over- 
come resistance is the measure of the man. 

^re^i^ebolution Conbitton£; 

The past which lay back of Bishop Moore's ministry 
in Virginia therefore claims our attention as a necessary 
condition to the understanding of his task and an appre- 
ciation of his character and influence. 

No statement could be more untrue to the facts of 
history than that the Virginia Colony was an enterprise 
conceived and executed for material and commercial ends 


alone. It is line Hint it \v;is not. like tlic New Kiit»l;in(l 
Colony, tlu" outi^iow tli oj" rclitfious contention and perse- 
cution, and tile nun wlio c()ni|)ose(l it did not lia\c relig- 
ions giMiN anct's to |)fot'laini to tlu' world. Tiieir religion 
was normal, and their faith tiie faith of their forefathers; 
and it tx|)resse(l itself in Virginia, as it had in l\ngland, 
without ostentation, in a way thai was |)erfectly normal 
antl natural. 'Vhv ancient I'oyal Charter under which 
these Virginia settlers sailed, commended and accepted 
"their desires for a furtherance of so noble a work, which 
may, by the providence of Almighty (lod, hereafter lend 
to the glory of His Divine Majesty in propagating the 
Christian religion to such i)e()i)le as yet live in darkness 
and miserable ignorance of the true knowledge and wor- 
ship of (iod, and may in time bring infidels and savages 
living in those parts to human civility, and to a settled and 
quiet government. (Ilening, Vol. 1, Page 57.)" 

The Virginia Colony was a missionary as well as a 
commercial enterprise. If she is to remain true to her 
traditions and loyal lo her ancient heritage, the Church 
in Virginia must ever continue to be devoted to the great 
mission of the Church to extend the Kingdom of God, for 
one of the fundamental objects in founding this colony 
was the extension of the (losj)el under the intluence of 
the Church of England. The Colonists were instructed 
"to provide that the true word and service of God and 
Christian faith be preached, planted and used according 
to the doctrine rites and religion now professed and estab- 
lished within our realm of l^ngland." The last instruc- 
tions given to the Colonists by the King's Council were to 
"serve and fear God," remembering that "every planta- 
tion whicli our Heavenly Father hath not planted shall 
be rooted out." The sermon i)reached on the 25111 of 
April, 1609, and one preached in February, 1610, to the 
emigrants to Virginia have been preserved and live to re- 
buke the untruth so widely disseminated that the Virginia 
Colony in its incipiency was solely a commercial enter- 
prise undertaken by a number of godless adventurers. 
The lone ivy-mantled tower at Jamestown, the many 
ancient churches which date back lo the colonial period 


of Virginia's history, boar witness to llic Jailli of our 

Colonial CLLiuiv. 

In superficial history and benighted liction the custom 
has been to speak of the clergy of Colonial Virginia with 
ridicule and scorn. This has been done so largely and for 
so long a time that the vast majority of people, even in 
the Church, have come to believe that the term 'Colonial 
minister' is almost a synonym for all that was low and 
degraded in men. It is undoubtedly true that Virginia 
afforded a place of refuge to a number of ministers who 
left England because thej" could not well remain there, 
but these men who have been seized upon, advertised, 
exploited and held up to the public gaze and the pub- 
lic scorn were not types but exceptions. In St. John's 
Church, Hampton, a window has been placed memorial 
to the Colonial clergy of that Parish. Upon examining 
the records extending over 175 years, only one man was 
found who was unworthy of being named in the long list 
of godly men. On the walls of Bruton Parish Church, 
near the pulpit, a tablet has been placed in memory of the 
clergy of Bruton Parish Church from 1674 to 1873. Dur- 
ing this period of one hundred and ninety-nine years, not 
one minister is to be found against whom there stands a 
word of censure or reproach. They were men of educa- 
tion and of godly piety. Most of those who ministered 
here in the Colonial times were masters of arts of the 
universities of Oxford, Cambridge and Edinburgh, and we 
have the records giving the testimony of contemporaneous 
men to the effect that as a rule they were earnest and 
faithful ministers of the Gospel of Christ. Vice is more 
advertised than virtue. 

Other Conditions. 

The contribution of the Church to the cause of edu- 
cation, her influence upon legislation beginning with her 
prayers and benediction for the first legislative assembly 
held in America which assembled in the Church at James- 


low II in Kilil and ixUndini* down lo the t-losc ol the 
Colonial period, culniinafini* in lici- inlhuiuc ii|)on the 
j)atri()ts and slalcsnuMi of tlir rcvolidionai-v period of 
which tile nicniorials in liiuton Parish ('luiroh bear wit- 
ness, and hor intUuMicc npon home, the life and |)c'rs()nal 
character of her children, eicated an inlhiencc- which was 
never (jiiite obliterated by siibsecjuent events, and which 
livt'd in tile hearts of her people nnder the cold exterior 
ol the winter days which followed after, when it seemed 
that the warm cnrrents of life were frozen and dead be- 
yond all hope of recall. The Church subsequent to the 
revolution needed a revivalist in the truest sense of the 
word. But it needed one of sound judi>nient and of un- 
daunted faith and courage, for the Cluuch had come upon 
evil days. 

QTfjE Cfjurcl) Subsequent to tf)e Eebolution 

The struggle of the Churcii for her life after the Revo- 
hition was almost as tragic and desperate as the struggle 
of the Colony of 1()()7 foi" existence. 

About no |)eriod of American Church History are 
there more gross and yet more generally accepted miscon- 
ccptions. We are told and our children are told, that the 
Church was disestablished by tliose who were the cham- 
pions of religious freedom, and that these champions of 
liberty w i-ri' the defenders of the people against the claims 
of the (Jiurch. The Church was disestablished by the 
champions of religious freedom, but, "the disestablish- 
ment of the Church in Virginia was the work of its own 
members, who, in laying the foundations of their coun- 
try's liberty, believed that they should unselfishly sacri- 
fice the privileges the law had hitiierlo secured to them, 
that civil and religious liberty might be found insepar- 
ably united" (Rowland's Life of (leorge Mason, Vol. 1, 
J). 213). Of the live men aj)pointed to revise the laws of 
the commonwealth, namely: Jeflerson, Pendleton, Wythe, 
George Mason and Tliomas Ludwcll Lee, four were active 
Vestrymen of the Episcopal Church, and Jeflerson had 
also at one time been a Vestryman, and from papers ex- 
tant it is in evidence that the very law in question was 


drafted prior to the time when (ieorge Mason resigned 
from the Coniniittee. A marked distinction should be 
made between the disestablishment of the Church and 
her spoliation. The acts of the Legislature passed in 1787, 
1799, and finally in 1802, were not inspired by a spirit of 
religious liberty. They were designed to confiscate the 
property of the Church, and resulted in the sale of her 
glebe lands. Against legislation looking to this end 
George Mason, Edmund Pendleton, and other Virginia 
Churchmen, did protest, because they believed that such 
procedure was contrary to the principles of connnon hon- 
esty. This left the Church stripped and impoverished. 
Her once wealthy mendjers had sacrificed their fortunes 
in behalf of their country. Among the masses of the peo- 
ple there was a feeling of prejudice. It has been gener- 
ally stated and believed that this was due to the fact that 
the clergy of the Church had been Tories. As a matter of 
fact the records show that the Virginia Clergy, led by 
Rev. Drs. Madison and Bracken, were, with very few 
exceptions, ardent supporters of the cause of liberty. 
The prejudice had a reasonable basis in the fact that 
prior to the disestablishment the people had been taxed 
by the State to support a Church to which some of them 
did not adhere, to which was added the dislike which at 
this time was felt against the Church because of her Eng- 
lish connection. Thrown upon her own resources the 
Church made a desperate struggle until almost the middle 
of the last century. 

Other conditions contributed to the difficulties which 
the Church was subsequently called to face, and created 
obstacles which threatened to completely terminate her 
existence in Virginia. 

The Church during the colonial period was conspicu- 
ously the church of the aristocracy. These old Virginians 
provided spiritual ministrations for their own souls and 
for their own slaves and legislated for the support of the 
Church by everybody whether they believed in it or not. 
The Church, however, seemed never to have won the af- 
fection of the middle classes generally. Subsequent to 
the revolution even to the present time this Church, while 


tho most (Uniotnilic of all religious organizations in her 
constitutional provisions, has t-vrr riinaincd aristocratic 
in toni' and too niucli so in tendency, creating the im- 
pression, which continues to ixist. that she does not offer 
the most congenial atmosphere lor the masses of the 
people. That this feeling has heen and is still due as 
nuich to the |)i-eiu<lice of the masses as to tin- i)ridc and 
prejudice found in the (-hurch is unciueslionahly true. 
The fact is that the feeling exists, and it existed in the 
years suhstujuent to tin- revolution with an intensity which 
was exceedingly prejudicial to the Church, and there were 
not lacking those outside our fold who fanned this fhime 
of i)rejudice into the white heat of hitter animosity for de- 
nominational advantage. 

Then, too, our forefathers were not all saints by any 
means. The social life and personal habits of the Vir- 
ginians of these bygone days were as far removed as can 
well be imagined from the stern and austere negative 
piety of Puritan New England. Indeed, subsequent to the 
revolution, and prior to the coming of Bishop Moore, not 
only the Church but spiritual religion also seemed to have 
declined to the point where license reigned with unbridled 
excess. A contemporaneous diary mentions five differ- 
ent kinds of wines and whiskey served at a dinner which 
followed immediately after Church in the hospitable 
home of a leading Churchman, and speaks of the occur- 
rence as being customary and generally prevalent. (1am- 
bling was notoriously widespread, and profanity gener- 
ally desecrated the speech of those whose education and 
culture did not demand it for clear and forcible expres- 
sion of thought. So general were these lax moral condi- 
tions that for many years it was (juite impossible to pass 
even in Church Conventions any legislation corrective of 
these practices on the ])art of those who hated to be re- 
formed, and resented by majority votes every effort look- 
ing to a moral and social reformation even within the 
Church itself. 

Added to these evil conditions the Church was beset 
with violent opposition from without. Into the valley of 
Virginia had come the immigrant Ulster men in large 


numbers, bringing with thcni inherited and tenacious pre- 
judices against the established Church, and sworn to 
opposition to her chums and to her extension. These 
Scotch-Irish settlers not only dominated in large measure 
the religious thought of the valley of Virginia, but ex- 
tended their influence with immigration into Eastern 

The Methodists, though welcomed in the person of 
Whitfield, subsecfuently allied themselves with the Bap- 
tists and Presbyterians in opposing the Episcopal Church 
and confiscating the property which had been held by 
the Establishment. 

Cpisfcopacp in "tTirginia — t^fte election of 
Eeb. iBv. ^riffitl) 

Prior to the Revolution the Church in Virginia dur- 
ing the whole Colonial period had been under the Episco- 
pal jurisdiction of the Lord Bishop of London. Subse- 
quent to the Revolution there existed in the mind of the 
many of the Virginia Churchmen a feeling of opposition 
to the idea of electing a Bishop and sending him to Eng- 
land for consecration. This opposition was due in part 
to a prejudice against taking any step which would renew 
and establish any vital connection between the State 
Church of England and the Church in Virginia. It was 
also due to indifference and to an indisposition on the 
part of many in the Church to have their lax living in- 
terfered with by Episcopal control and by a revived spir- 
ituality in the Church. Pursuant, however, to recommen- 
dations of the General Convention it was determined by 
the Virginia Council of 1786 to elect a Bishop, and the 
Rev. Dr. Griffith was elected by a vote of thirty-two out 
of a total vote of forty-nine. He was a man of marked 
ability and of spiritual power, but owing to a lack of per- 
sonal means was unable to go to England to receive con- 
secration, and the Churchmen in Virginia failed to re- 
spond to the subscription that was asked to send him at 
the expense of the Church. The confidence of the Church 
in Virginia in Dr. Griftith was, however, reasserted when 


llu- Convention ol 17.S7 (lirccMrd llic St;in(lin.i> Coniinillcc 
of llu' Dioccsi- to ask I'oi' liis c-onsciijilion ;il the Imnds of 
Hislioj) White of l\nnsyl\ ;ini;i iind liislioj) Piovosl ol" 
New Yoi'k. 'riusc Hisho|)s, however, felt ohliijed to de- 
cline tile i-e(|nest. luiNini* pledi^ed the Kniflish Hisiiops, 
from whom they luid received their conseci;ition. not to 
consecrate anyone in the I'nited Slates nntil three Bishops 
had received consecration from the Kni^lish ('Jini'ch (Bish- 
op White's Memoirs, 172). In 1789 Bev. Dr. (Irillith re- 
signed his election, and a few months afterwards died at 
the home of the Bishop of Pennsylvania while altendinii 
the (leneral (^.on\ cntion of 17(SU. 

nrfje ClEctioti of Et. Bcb. James! iHatigon 
Jfirfiit iBis;f)op in Virginia 

The Convention of the Church in Virginia which met 
in 1790 elected the Rev. Dr. James Madison, then President 
of the College of William and Mary, to he Bishop of the 
Diocese. He was a man of scholarly disposition, devoted 
especially to the study of science and philosophy; his 
manners were simple and courteous, and his nature kind- 
ly and benevolent. He was consecrated at Lambeth in 
1790 by the Archbishop of Canterlniry and the Bishops of 
London and Bochester. The annals of his Episcoi)ate 
can be dwelt upon liere only in so far as they reflect the 
conditions which innnediately precede the coming of 
Bisho]) Moore. That he was fdled with an earnest desire 
to further the interests of the (^Juirch in Virginia may be 
seen from reading his early Convention addresses. He, 
however, faced stupendous dilTiculties and opj)()sition 
from within, and especially from without, the Church. 
In the very first years of his Kj)isco|)ale the Church was 
disestablished and ruthlessly despoiled by legislative en- 
actments insi)ired by violent denominational op|)osition. 
The Church was left stripped of hei- possessions and de- 
pendent upon the su|)|)ort of lu-r im|)()verished and dis- 
couraged members. Infidel tendencies \\'hich had l^ecome 
fashionable in France, found lodgment in the minds of 
many persons prominent in the social and legislative life 


of Virginia, and among the unlearned and careless the 
influence of godless philosophy and materialistic thought 
sapped the spiritual energies of the people and demor- 
alized the life of the Church, (iross laxness of living re- 
sulted, and as was inevitable, the growth of immorality, 
dissipation and irreverence increased and spread through 
the State and poisoned and depraved the lives of many 
within the Churcli. The Bishop upon the slender pittance 
of one hundred pounds a year continued to make his 
visitations and his annual reports which, however, became 
more and more disheartening. His last Council address 
was delivered in 1805, at which time, urging upon the 
Convention the feebleness of his health, he asked for an 
assistant. Action upon the matter was however deferred, 
and from this time, namely from 1805 to 1812, when the 
death of Bishop Madison occurred, there is no record of 
any Convention of the Church having been held. 

(E^fje election of PigJjop iWoorc 

The Convention called in 1812 to elect a Bishop to 
fill the vacancy, failed to secure a canonical quorum — of 
fifteen clergymen and fifteen laymen required. The thir- 
teen clergymen and twelve laymen who convened pro- 
ceeded to vote for a Bishop and chose the Bev. Dr. Brack- 
en, who in 1813 declined the election. 

The Convention of Virginia held in 1812 and 1814 
revised and reenacted the canon relative to the number 
of delegates necessary for a quorum, fixing the number 
at nine, but providing that "for altering or fixing a canon 
the presence of fifteen delegates should be necessary." 
(Journals of Convention, Hawks, p. 95). In counting a 
([uorum the clerical and lay-delegates were numbered 
together and not counted in the two orders. This fact is 
here mentioned because it appears that there were only 
seven clergymen present at the Convention of 1814. 
There were, however, present nineteen lay-delegates. 
The clerical delegates present at this memorable Council 
which met in the Capitol, in the City of Bichmond, ,on 
May 4th, 1814, were the Bev. Oliver Norris and the Bev. 
W.H. Wilrner, of Alexanchia, the Bev. Wm. H. Meade, of 


Fi-cdirick Palish, [he lUv. .1. ("aim roii. 1). 1)., ol' ("iiinhcr- 
laiul. the lUv. John Dunn, ol' Shclhurnc the \\v\. .1. Hii- 
chaiian. 1). 1).. ol' Ili'iiiico Parisii, and the Kcv. Andrew 
Syinc, ol' liristol Parish. The names ol' most of the nine- 
teen lay-dclcgates |)resent at this ("ouiuil are nearly all 
familiar in the ('church in N'iriijinia today. Amoiiif tlu'in 
\ve lind the name ol the Hon. .John Marshal, as a lay- 
deputy from Monumental Church. 

It was "Resolved that the ai)|)()inlment of a Rishop 
lor this Diocese is highly expedient and necessary for the 
maintenance and supi)()rt of the Church." 

It was next "Resolved that tin- Convention i)roceed 
immediately to the election of a person to till the Episco- 
pate in the same." Dr. James McClurg then presented 
a certified extract from the Vestry hook of the Monumen- 
tal Church in Richmond showing the appointment of the 
Rev. Richard Channing Moore, D. D., of the City of New 
York, to the Rectorship of that Church. 

On motion, "Ordered that the Secretary read sundry 
letters, exhibited by members of the Standing Committee 
from Dr. Moore and the Rt. Rev. Rishop Hobart. 

Dr. Moore was nominated to lill the otlice of Bishop 
in this State. 

No other person being in nomination, the Convention 
proceeded to ballot for a Bishop. 

The Hon. John Marshal and Mr. Edmund Lee were 
appointed to count the ballots, who reported that there 
were twenty-three votes for Dr. Moore and one for Dr. 
John Buchanan, whereupon Reverend Richard Channing 
Moore was declared to be duly elected to the Episcopate 
in the Diocese of Virginia, and the members of the Con- 
vention proceeded to subscribe to the testimonials re- 
quired by the Constitution of the General Church in the 
United States." (Hawks' Journals, p. 92.) 

f^ifi Carlp mtt anb Mini&tvp 

Bishop Moore was nearly fifty-two years old when 
made Bishop of Virginia, having been born in the City of 
New York on the twenty-first day of August, 1762. His 
father, Thomas Moore. %\as the son of the Hon. John 


Moore, who had served as one of his Majesty's Council 
for the province of New York. At eight years of age he 
was placed under the care of Mr. Alexander Leslie, Pro- 
fessor of Languages in King's College, now Columbia 
College. At sixteen he began the study of medicine under 
Doctor Richard Bayley, a distinguished physician and 
surgeon of New York City, and having completed his pro- 
fessional studies he began the practice of medicine and 
built up a large and lucrative practice, which he con- 
tinued until 1787. 

Bishop Moore seemed i)r()ne to recognize an overrul- 
ing providence in the common occurrences and coinciden- 
ces of his daily life. He attributed the turning of his life 
to Christ with full and serious purpose to the chance read- 
ing of the passage of Scripture containing the question of 
Saul the persecutor, "Lord, what wilt thou have me to 
do?" upon which he chanced to fall while waiting one day 
for his turn in a barber shop. His was a nature which 
gave itself with enthusiasm to the convictions of his mind 
and to the devotions of his heart, and it is not surprising 
that having found the more abundant life, he should have 
consecrated himself to the purpose of making the way of 
salvation known to others. Having read for orders, while 
continuing his medical practice, he was ordained deacon 
in July, 1787, by the Rt. Rev. Dr. Provost, in St. George's 
Church, New Y^ork City, being the first person to receive 
ordination at his hands. In September he was advanced 
to the priesthood and took charge of Grace Church, Rye, 
in the County of Westchester, New York. In 1788 he ac- 
cepted a call to St. Andrew's Church, Staten Island, where 
he ministered for twenty-one years with fidelity and 

While noted for his fidelity as a pastor. Dr. Moore was 
best known as a convincing and eloquent preacher. His 
intense spiritual conviction, his earnest piety, his charm 
and grace of manner, his tenderness of feeling, his sincere 
devotion to his Master, and absolute dependence upon the 
inspiration and power of the Spirit, whom he invoked in 
constant and earnest prayer, to which was added a voice 
of melodious sweetness whose tender and pleading tones 


won Ihc sym|);ithy ;m<l iiii*ai;V(l (he Mlhntion ot his lu;ii- 
cM's. fombiiu'd lo crcnli' lor liim a itputalion as a prcaclicr 
which attractt'd crowded coniiirc-i^atioiis lo luai- him |)ro- 
chiim Ihc message of salvation I'rom the ^reat t*os|)el of re- 
demption. It is slated that upon one occasion, wlien hav- 
ing preached and concluded the service w illi the hene(Mc- 
tion, to his great surprise lie ohsei'ved tliat no one |)resent 
seemed dis])()sed lo leave the CJun'ch. Alter a short in- 
terval one of the congregation arose and recjuested him 
lo |)i-each to them the second time. Alter singing a hymn 
a second discourse was delivered, when again the congre- 
gation relused to leave and a re([uest was made that he 
siiould continue to speak. Having responded to this sec- 
ond re([uest, he concluded the service, and announcing 
that he was too exhausted to speak any longer, he again 
dismissed the people with the blessing and urged them to 
return to their homes. Having read this incident some 
time since to a young Flnglish clergyman, he remarked, 
"Well, really that is a very remarkable incident; you 
know I never had anything like that to occur during my 

In 1809 Doctor Moore became lector of St. Stephen's 
CJiurch in New York City, comj)osed at the time of his 
acceptance of the call of not more than thirty families; 
when, in five years later, he resigned this Church to come 
to Virginia, he left in the Church about four hundred 

^is life anb itlinistrp in 'Virginia 

The call extended Dr. Moore to come to Virginia was 
preceded by a number of interesting letters in which, on 
the one hand, he was urged by the Hev. W. H. Wilmer, the 
Rev. William Meade, the Rev. Mr. Xorris, and by a joint 
letter signed by Bushrod Washington and Edmund L. Lee 
to come to Richmond and ])reach. In these letters assur- 
ance was given thai if the people could hear him preach, 
his re])utation would be established by the evidence which 
his presence would give of his power, and that there 
would be no (juestion that he woidd be called to the rec- 
torship of Monumental Church, and soon afterwards to 


become Bishop of the Diocese of Virginia. Some of these 
letters Doctor Moore seems not to have answered at all. 
To others he sent belated replies. In all of them he de- 
cidedly but courteously declined to act upon the sugges- 
tion that he should visit Richmond in furtherance of the 
proposition of securing the call to the Church and the 
election to the Ei)iscopate. To the letter of Bushrod 
Washington and Edmund Lee he sent the following reply: 

"New York, Dec. 16tli, 1813. 

Dear Sir: The situation in whicli Providence hath placed me, 
and the blessings with which my labours in this city have been 
attended, would render me extremely culpable, were I to listen to 
any invitation, or consent to any change, except such an one as 
bore the evident traces of liis own divine appointment. The desti- 
nies of my life I have long since submitted to the God I serve; it 
is therefore my duty, and I can assert with truth tliat it is my in- 
clination, to be disposed of agreeably to his will. Could I be 
convinced that the sphere of my usefulness would be enlarged, or 
the cause of the Redeemer be promoted, by my removal to Virginia, 
I should think it criminal to hesitate a moment, or to indulge the 
least fear or apprehension. Your address to me upon the subject 
has excited my deepest attention, and has led me to seek most 
ardently for the direction of heaven upon the occasion, and al- 
though I cannot consent to visit Flichmond as you propose, still I 
should not feel myself justifiable, were I to decline altogether 
the propositions you have made me. ^Vith respect to pecuniary 
matters, my present establishment is so comfortable, that I stand 
in need of no change; under this impression it would be imprudent 
in me to risk the alienation of my people's regard, by looking for 
a settlement which perhaps may not be within the control of my 
friends at the southward: for a man. Sir, who has seen fifty years, 
to rush into such an experiment, would betray, in my opinion, a 
want of those solid principles necessary to preserve the confidence 
of my old friends, and to secure the good opinion of those with whose 
acquaintance I may hereafter be honoured; in addition to whicli 
evil it would discover also a wish to lead, instead of toeing led by 
Providence. Should the congregation of the I^piscopal Church at 
Richmond, from the representations of character which they may 
have received of me, think proper to call me as their rector, with a 
suitable support, and should the Convention of the state unite in 
my election to the episcopate, I should think it my duty to make 
them as early a visit as possible in order to converse with the lead- 
ing members of the Church upon the subject, and to come to an 
immediate conclusion respecting the expediency of my removal. 
The Church in Virginia, I have been informed, is from a variety 


of circiinistaiues in a (Ii'I)i-i'ssihI situation. Siioiild it Tail to my lot 
to bi' appoinli-d lo watcti over lu-r intcii-sls. iii\ ulinost energies 
shall be exerted in rei)airini,' her waste and desolate i)laees: it is 
the soeiety. Sir, into whose bosom I was received at my l)a|)tism, 
and in whose relij^ious i)e(iiliarities I have been educated from my 
infancy. To see her la\ by her weeds and i)ut on her beautiful jjar- 
ments, in which Zion in her prosperil\ shall be arrayed, would 
convey to my mind sensations of the i)urest joN . To promote this 
object, lidelity in her clergx is an indisi)ensablc re(|uisite. To 
produce this elfecl the\- must hi' laboureis indeed in the Vine\ard 
of the Kedeenier. 

Jk'lieve me, dear Sir, &c. 


Finally the tall Avas extended to Dr. Moore to become 
the rector of the Monumental Church in Richmond and 
was accepted, it would seem, some time during April, 1814. 
Notice of his acceptance of this call having been certified 
to the Convention of the Diocese, which met on May 1, 
1814, Dr. Moore was, as we have seen, elected witiunit 
opj)osition to be Bishoj) of Virginia. 

Bishop Hobart, with whom Dr. Moore had had a se- 
rious controversy while they were both serving churches 
in New York City, as to the expediency of conducting 
informal prayer meetings and services in the homes of 
the j)eople, seems, in after years, to have become con- 
vinced of the supreme loyalty of Dr. Moore to the Prayer 
Book, and of liis devotion to the use of the Liturgy un- 
altered and unimpaired in the service of the Church, and 
while at the time of the controversy he looked with scant 
resj)eet upon the informal devotional services conducted 
willi such maikc-d success by Dr. Moore, lie became con- 
vinced, when the heat of controversy had subsided, of liis 
sui)reme loyalty to the Church, to her teachings and to her 
ancient lilurgy. and sent to \'irgiuia the following letter 
endorsing, as Bishoj) of New York, his life imd ministry: 

"New York, Ai)iil 2.')fh. 1811. 

My Dear Sir, — I have furnished llic iUv. Dr. Moore with the 
testimonial required b\ the canons in the case of a removal from 
one diocese to another. 1 deem it, howevei', an act of justice to 
him, further to state to you, that Dr. Moore's ministrations have 
been uniformly respectable, popular, and useful. He evinces sin- 


cere attachineni to Ihe doctrines, Ihe order, and the worship of the 
venerable Chiirrh in which he has been educated, and in which he 
has been for nian>' years a zealous labourer. And such is the con- 
fidence placed in his fidelity to his principles, and in his prudent 
and zealous efforts to advance her interests, should the order of 
Providence remove him to Virginia, that I believe he will go there 
with the good wishes and the prayers of his brethren generally in 
this quarter. I very sincerely declare that Dr. Moore's intercourse 
with me is so frank, respectful, and friendly, and he appears so 
heartily disposed to co-operate with me in advancing the common 
interest of our Zion, that I shall regret his removal from this dio- 
cese, at the same time that I trust and believe that his ministrations 
and labours, by the blessing of God, will be advantageous to the 
cause of religion and the Church in Virginia. 
I remain, dear sir, 

Very sincerely and respectfully. 

Your obedient friend and brother, 

Edmund I. Lee, Est[." 

Rev. Dr. Richard Channing Moore was consecrated 
Bishop of Virginia in St. James' Church, Philadelphia, on 
the 18th of May, 1814, by Bishops White, Hobart, Griswold 
and Dehon. It is distinctly interesting to note that this 
event, so significant and vital to the Church in Virginia, 
took place almost exactly one hundred years prior to the 
day when the Church in Virginia, on the 20th day of May, 
1914, elected the Rev. Dr. William Cabell Brown to serve 
as a Bishop in the Church of God in this Diocese. 

In this connection it may be permitted to us to ex- 
jjress the hope and voice the prayer, which will, we are 
sure, receive the approbation of every heart here present, 
that the Spirit of Almighty God may so bless and empower 
him in the discharge of the duties and responsibilities of 
his sacred oflice that the Church, revived under Bishop 
Moore, may be strengthened and developed by the assis- 
tance which he will render to the present Bishop of Vir- 
ginia, and by the witness which the Bishop Coadjutor 
elect will give to the truth as it is in Jesus. 

From this digression from the annals, but not from 
the apostolic spirit of Bishop Moore's life, we return for 
what must of necessity be a brief and faintly suggestive 
outline of the events which characterized the eventful life 


and s( r\ ici- ol' Hisliop Moore's Kpisc-opalc. In bSl.') \vf 
iiiul him presiding over tlie Convenlioii ol his Diocese, 
vhere loiirteeii clergymen were present, just Iwice as 
many as were present at the preceding convention, wlien 
liis election look |)lace. The address delivered by the 
l^isliop on this occasion is imbued witb the s])irit ol" laitb 
and optimism which characterized his entire ministry, 
and is I'ldl ol' llu- spirit of thanksgiving and praise. He 
seenu'd never to forget that he was but tbe instrument of 
(lod's gracious pro\i(lence and was ever wont to ascribe 
to the Cbrist praise and honor lor the gift of the S|)irit, 
upon whom be relied for guidance and |)ower. Where 
tbe human instrument was j)raised and honored tbe tri- 
bute was j)ai(l to those wbo labored with him in tbe min- 
istry of tbe gospel. To tbis Convention be said in part: 

"In ever}' parisb wbicb I bave visited, I bave discov- 
ered tbe most animated wisb in tbe people to repair the 
waste places of our Zion, and to restore tbe church of 
their fathers to its primitive purity and excellence. I 
have found their minds alive to tbe truths of religion, and 
have discovered an attachment to our excellent liturgy 
exceeding my utmost expectations. I have witnessed a 
sensibility to divine things bordering on the spirit of gos- 
pel times. 1 have seen congregations, upon the mention 
of that glory which once irradiated with its beams the 
church in Virginia, burst into tears, and by their holy 
emotions perfectly electrify my mind. 

The apostolic rite of confuniation, wbicli I have ad- 
ministered in several parishes, was received by people of 
all ages with the greatest joy, and a general principle of 
imion and exertion was upon those occasions universally 
expressed. Parishes which have been destitute of minis- 
terial aid for many years, which had slumbered until the 
warmest friends of tbe church conceived it to bave been 
tbe sleep of death, have, in two instances, been awakened 
from that state of torpor in which they were involved, 
and bave arisen in all tbe vigor of perfect health. The 
younger clergy of tbis diocese, who, from their youth and 
spiritual attainments, are well qualified for the glorious 
work, have exerted themselves in a manner deserving the 


most honourable iiieiilion. Tlicy liave carried the stand- 
ard of the Lord Jesus Christ through a considerabk^ por- 
tion of this church; they have gone out into the highways 
and hedges, preaching the truths of their Divine Master; 
and by their holy conversation with the people, have 
adorned the Gospel of Christ. A number of their elder 
brethren, though prevented by age from using the same 
exertion, have laboured with fidelity, and contributed 
their best efforts to promote that work which has been 
committed to their hands. The laity have been equally 
assiduous in the discharge of that duty peculiar to their 
station — the duty of providing for the ministers of re- 
ligion. May heaven reward them for their labours of 
love; and may every cup of cold water which they have 
given to a disciple, in the name of a disciple, receive a 
disciple's reward. 

"The members of the church in this city, brethren, 
deserve my sincerest thanks, for the friendship, affection, 
and indulgence with which they have favoured me : — 
they have shown, by their marked and continued tender- 
ness towards me and my family, that they are alive to all 
the sensibilities which adorn our nature. I have found 
in them not only friends, but brothers and benefactors; 
they have met my necessities with a solicitude beyond my 
expectations; they have anticipated my every want; they 
have discharged the duty of the most affectionate children 
towards their spiritual father. 

"If there ever was a period in which exertion was 
necessary, and if there ever was a period which bids fair 
to crown that exertion with success, this is the time. 
Though few in number, yet, depending for support upon 
the i)romises of Ciod, we may look for an abundant bless- 
ing upon our labours. Jehovah has promised to be with 
his church to the end of the world, and he will fulfil his 
declaration. The parishes are invoking our aid. Oh! 


listen, I hcsfcch you, to tlu-ir uuiiurous ciiticatics. He 
sti;i<ll':ist, tlu'ii, he umnovoabk', always ahoundini* in tin- 
\\i)vk of tlu> Lord, and your labour will not he in vain 
in llu' Lord." 

l-'i-oni the rush and turmoil ol our uuxkrn lift' it 
would he most diverting to be transported back lor a 
while to the almost ])rimitive simplicity of these bygone 
days. Wc would be- willing lor a while to exchange the 
fast Hying train with its shrieking whistle for the packet 
boat running from Richmond to the mountains, whose 
coming was announced by the far away tremulous notes 
ol the echoing horn whose bygone call still comes to some 
of us out of the reveries of the past. It would be a divert- 
ing and unique experience to take a vacation by stage 
coach journey through valleys and over the hills of Vir- 
ginia from Richmond to Frederick County, and over the 
vast territory beyond to the Rlue Ridge Mountains. Rut 
to have no other way of going, and to be impelled by the 
perennial call of duty to make these long and wearisome 
journeys regardless of weather conditions, and to keep 
going when old age and bodily infirmity were creeping 
on, tested the fidelity and devotion of the Ri.shoj). With 
unrelenting zeal he met the hardships which his large 
Diocese caused him to face and w^as ever among his breth- 
ren as one who served as a good soldier of Jesus Christ. 

fiis first Episcopal act was the consecration of Monu- 
mental Church, which he continued to serve as Rector 
during the entire period of his Episcopate. 

The Beloved Pastor. 

As a i)astoi' he won the esteem and affection not only 
of his own congregation, but of all the community where 
he lived. While devoted and loyal to the doctrines and 
worship of his own Church, he was entirely free from the 
bigotry which so often makes chmchmen nariow minded 
and sectarian. Christians of every name loved him for 
his exceeding goodness. A striking testimonial of this 
high regard and affection was given when on the first of 
January, 183.3, he was ])resented with a beautiful copy of 
the New Testament i)rinted in golden letters on porcelain 


paper, which horc the following inscription : "Presented 
to the Right Reverend R. C. Moore by the ('Jtizens of Rich- 
mond, members of the different religious denominations, 
as a tribute of their affectionate regard and esteem for one 
who has so long and so carefully devoted his life to the 
great cause of Christianity." The cost of the book was 
fifty dollars, but that many might be privileged to join in 
the gift, no individual was allowed to contribute more 
than fifty cents. 

Christian Cooperation. 

His truly catholic views were strikingly exhibited in 
connection with his cooperation in the extension of the 
work of the American Rible Society. There were those 
in the Church who interpreted their ordination vows in 
terms of narrow exclusiveness, and by means of a process 
of reasoning, ecclesiastically logical, concluded that loyal- 
ty to the Church required them to withhold from any co- 
operation with those who were not in organic union wdth 
the Church. Bishop Hobart in 1816 issued a pastoral 
letter reiterating the views of Bishop Marsh and some 
others in England advising Episcopalians to withhold 
their patronage and support from the Bible Society upon 
the ground that cooperation with other Christians in this 
matter would be a virtual recognition of their defective 
ecclesiastical organizations and compromise their posi- 
tion as loyal Churchmen. 

With a full knowledge of the arguments advanced in 
this controversy against cooperation with the American 
Bible Society, Bishop Moore cordially accepted the posi- 
tion as the first President of the Virginia Branch of the 
American Bible Society, as the venerable Bishop White 
had previously done in Pennsylvania, and gave the society 
his cordial support until the time of his death. 

There are doubtless those who still persist in theo- 
rizing the Church into pure sectarianism, who would 
point to this Christian liberality on the part of Bishop 
Moore and Bishop White as an evidence of disloyalty to 
what they denominate as Catholic ])rinciples. Catholicity 
has ever been interpreted in the Virginia Church and by 


\'ii\i*ini;i iliiirclimcii in ;i far broader and moi-c (■liristian 
si)iril. and no one w lio knows llic loyal devotion ol Hisliop 
Moore to llie doctrine, discipline and worshij) of the l\|)is- 
copal C-luirch can (|uesli()n his loyalty as a ('duirchnian 
and his devotion to the truly ('.atholic ])riciples of her 
teaching. "There are some minds." says the Hev. Dr. 
Henshaw, the best known biographer ol Bishop Moore, 
"so strangely constituted as to be incapacitated loi- "hold- 
iiuj the Inith in louc." Tliey seem to supi)ose that an at- 
tachment to the distinctive i)rincii)les of the ('Juirch must 
prove itself genuine l)y the indulging ol an acerbity of 
temper towards all who do not embrace them by uttering 
the most bitter reproaches against the advocates of ditl'er- 
ent principles, and by keeping entirely aloof from all 
intercourse witli tliose who are not of our Communion." 
How far he was removed from these views is evidenced 
from the following extract from one of his Convention 
addresses: "We know no enemies, l)ut tlie enemies of our 
own exalted Redeemer; we stretch forth tiie right hand 
of fellowship to all who, in sincerity, call upon the Lord 
Jesus Christ; we expect to meet in heaven with Christians 
of all denominations — and we wish prosperity to all the 
Savior's friends." 

This position taken by Bishop Moore is in harmony 
with the Catholic sympathy and thought of the Churcli as 
we find it expressed by the Lambeth Conference of 1008 
(p. 185), "The Committee believe that few things tend 
more directly to godly union and concord than coopera- 
tion between members of diflerent connnunions in all 
matters pertaining to the social and moral welfare of the 
people. It is in the common service of humanity, in the 
name of Him Who is its Lord, tliat the ties of friendly 
relationship are most readily created and most surely 

His attitude relative to the question of (christian co- 
operation is also in harmony^ with the mind of those in 
the Anglican Communion who are in accord with the 
scholarly Bishop of Lincoln, who, in a recent i)astoral to 
his Diocese, affirms his conviction as to the permanent 
value of this article of the Conference, and declared, 


"This plan many of us have followed for long years past. 
We have never hesitated to co-operate freely with Non- 
conformists of every name in promoting those great social 
and moral reforms that all good men have at heart. We 
have never felt our Church principles compromised, nor 
our position misunderstood, through such co-operation." 

If this Church of ours is to become Catholic in her 
attitude and relationship as she is Catholic in her name 
and heritage, this principle must be accepted and allowed 
(we do not say ordered) as an essential principle of com- 
prehensive churchmanship. On the one hand, those who 
favor such co-operation must learn to refrain from im- 
pugning the motives of those whose conscientious convic- 
tions keep them from being able to enter into such co- 
operation; while, on the other hand, those who interpret 
their ordination vows and Christian calling in terms 
which inspire and sanction such fellowship and co-opera- 
tion, and who seek to make the Church sufiiciently com- 
prehensive to allow and invite such co-operation, cannot 
be justly charged with disloyalty, and will not be except 
by those who are either ignorant of the many declarations 
which the Church has made on this subject, or else by 
those who, in their efifort to restrain the Catholic spirit of 
the Church within the limits of an individual or party 
interpretation of the ministry of the Church, repudiate 
this comprehensive principle which the Church allows. 
In the comprehensive realm of spiritual life and relation- 
ship the Church should be not only tolerant, but generous- 
ly sympathetic, in her legislative provisions and otiicial 
interpretations which are designed to guide and direct 
the expression of the spirits who seek to serve Cod and 
humanity. Love is Catholic minded. Unity grows out of 
fellowship. Service is the path-finder of Truth, Sympathy 
and Co-operation are the human interpretations and ex- 
pressions of the Eternal love. While compelling none to 
serve contrary to their convictions, the Church must ever 
allow and invite convictions to serve and to find expres- 
sion if the motive of service is in harmony with the funda- 
mental truths of the Gospel revelation, otherwise the 
Church will become a sectarian body rather than a Catho- 
lic institution. 


ll was lliis hiri^iT vision ol lln' mission and nuanini* 
of [\\v ('Juiicli wliich led Hisli()|) While, of Pennsylvania, 
and Hisliop Mooi'i', of X'irginia, lo eiiliT into co-opei'alion 
willi Nonconlorniisl CJiurclies in an ellorl lo si)read Ihe 
knowledge ol' llu- ti'iilh as il is in .lesus, revealed in Ihe 
greal gospel of redeniplion. Snrely no ehai'ge of disloy- 
alty to the Cluireh can be justly made against those who 
follow the leadership of these two Reverend and Revered 
Fathers of (iod in the American Church. 

His Loyalty to the Distinchvi; Phinciplks oi the Church 

To infer from these exhibitions of his sj)irit of co-opera- 
tion that Rishop Moore was lax in his lov'alty to the Church 
would be to draw an unwarranted inference which is re- 
futed by the niany^ evidences of his supreme devotion to 
the Church, and by numerous letters which he addressed 
to his clergy enjoining upon them the necessity of using 
the liturgy of the Church unimpaired in the public ser- 
vices. To one of his clergy he writes: "What assurance, 
I would ask, can our vestries have in our integrity other 
than that they derive from our promises of fidelity? If 
they see us violate our ordination vows, will that viola- 
tion exalt us in their estimation? The Church boasts of 
her uniformity — I know if I w^ere engaged as a private 
worshipper in the services of the Church, the devotional 
feelings of my heart would be distressed to perceive the 
officiating minister violating order, and thus depriving me 
of a service to which I have a legitimate claim, and which 
he is bound to perform." To another clergyman he 
writes: "As I know from experience, the temptations to 
iiberrate from the Liturgy with which you will be as- 
sailed; you must pardon me, in requesting that v'ou resist 
them all. We have solemnly promised to conform to the 
discii)line and worship of the Church upon all public 
occasions; and however agreeable a dej)arture from our 
obligation may be to some, still men of principle will 
venerate and respect us for our ndelily, and be j)leased 
to see in us a scrupulous regard to our ordination vows." 
In a letter to another of his clergy he expresses his 
opposition to combining with others in the use of free 


churches in view of tlie doctrinnl diU'erences and contro- 
versies which in his day were so rile in the State. "A 
free Church," he saj's, "ever has been and ever will be 
a bone of contention. By inculcating from the same pul- 
pit the propriety of infant Baptism one Sunday, and their 
want of title to that Sacrament, the next Sabbath; by in- 
culcating particular election one Sunday, and general re- 
demption another; by inculcating the use of the Liturgy 
one day, and insisting upon no Liturgy tomorrow, the 
minds of the peojjle will become confused, and it will 
appear a matter of indifference what sentiments they 
cherish, and to what denomination they belong or what 
system of worship the}' adopt." 

To his clergy he also wrote letters dealing with [he 
practical and parochial side of their ministerial life. To 
one of restless mind and of a roving disposition he wrote : 
"Before you conclude to settle in any place, reflect deeply 
upon the subject, and, when your mind is made up, enter 
upon the discharge of your duties with spirit; never ex- 
pect to fix yourself in any parish in which everything will 
be agreeable, but endeavoring to meet your difficulties 
with fortitude, enduring hardness as a good servant of 
Jesus Christ. A frequent change of residence will operate 
to the disadvantage of anj'^ man. Endeavor to be sta- 
tionary in your habits, and in so doing Providence will 
take care of you and promote you in due time; but should 
you be found frequently on the wing, depend upon it such 
a disposition will prove a disadvantage to you through 
life. I have dropped the above remark from motives of 
a sincere and fatherly regard, they are such as I should 
present to my son, and endeavor to impress on his mind 
in indelible characters." 

A letter addressed to another clergyman of the Dio- 
cese urging fidelity in pastoral visiting and giving practi- 
cal instruction as to how such visits can be made effective 
is most interesting. "Take your horse and go to every 
family in your parish; breakfast with one and pass an 
hour in suitable religious conversation with the family; 
dine with a second and pursue the same course; take a 
cup of tea or coffee with a third, and read, converse and 


|)f;iy willi lluiii ;ill. When yon li;i\c iinislicd dcsotc a 
lew weeks to your studies and l)e,i*iii aifain. and ne\'ei' 
tliink llie woi'k linished so loni* as you |)()ssess heallh and 
stren^tli and lili-." Surely "Old limes have chani*e(K old 
manners none." and mosl of the pasloral callintf of Uxiay 
has descended lo a much lowi'r plane. 

'\\\v devolioii oT Bishop Moore to Die Liturgy oT tiie 
(".huieh and his insistence upon its use without alteration 
in the regular services of the Church, did not preclude 
him from taking a vital interest in estahlishing and fre- 
quenting the more informal meeting of what was known 
as the "Associations," wliere a numher of clergy gathered 
together for conference and |)rayer and series of services 
for the good of the community. Of an a.ssociation held 
in Alexandria in 1831 he thus spoke in his address to the 
Convention of 1832: "I emharked for Alexandria at which 
place we held an association. On that occasion we were 
joined by a number of the clergy of this Diocese and of 
Maryland, and were assisted in our labours by the Rev. 
Dr. Henshaw, and the Hev. Mr. Johns, of Baltimore, and 
Rev. Dr. Bedell, of Philadelphia. To say that our meet- 
ing at that time was instructive and agreeable, would be 
cxjjressing myself in language too faint for the occasion. 
A spirit of great zeal and fervour and devotion appeared 
to animati' every bosom, the congregations were deeply 
solemn and attentive, and overllowing; many were awak- 
ened to the consideration of eternal things and openly 
avowed their love and gratitude to the Almighty. It 
would rejoice my heart, brethren, to witness a similar 
evidence of di\ine influence in every |)arish in the Dio- 
cese. As a j)roof of the devotional feeling wliieh j)re- 
vailed, more es|)ecially among the young, 1 with pleasure 
announce lo the Convention, that 1 confirmed, during my 
visit, uj)wards of ninety persons." 

In addition to the services rendered in his own Dio- 
cese Bishop Moore made Episcopal visitations in North 
Carolina from 1819 to 1823, and in Kentucky and Ten- 
nessee and other Dioceses during periods of vacancy, 
besides continuing to serve as Rector of Monumental 


(irte election of Mi^\)op Mtaht ag ^sf£(t£itant Pig!)op 

111 1823 ho expresses the hope of soon having an as- 
sistant in Monnniental Church, and oilers to contrihute 
personally five hundred dollars a year for his support, 
Tliis liope was realized tlirougli tlie co-()i)eration of the 
Conventions of 1824 and 1825. Tlius Monumental Church 
became, as it were, the Cathedral Church of the Diocese 
of Virginia. There is, however, no record existent of its 
having been oflicially designated as such, and the Conven- 
tion of Virginia seems for some reason to have failed to 
make any appropriation for building an Episcopal throne, 
nor does the Bishop seem to have been given either a 
miter, crosier, or pectoral Cross, and yet he seems to have 
been a ver}^ good Bishop after all. 

In 1829 the Convention met in Charlottesville. The 
Bishop was now in his sixty-seventh year. At the Con- 
vention of the previous year he had asked that the con- 
stitution and canons of the Church should be so revised 
as to make the election of an assistant Bishop possible. 
This having been done, it was now "Resolved that tliis 
Convention deem it expedient, considering the age and 
bodily infirmity of our most venerated Bishop, to proceed 
to the election of an assistant, who is not to be considered 
as entitled to the succession, but that it shall be the right 
and duty of the Convention of the diocese of Virginia, on 
the demise of our venerated Bishop, to proceed to the 
election of a principal Bishop as a successor to the said 
deceased Bishop." 

The Convention, upon the passage of this resolution 
proceeded to an election, and the Reverend Dr. Wm. 
Meade, who received every vote, excepting two blank 
votes, cast by the members of the Convention. This elec- 
tion proved a great satisfaction and relief to Bishop 
Moore, who ever spoke of Dr. Meade in terms of deep ap- 
preciation and affection. The General Convention, while 
consenting to the Consecration of Bishop Meade, in spite 
of what it considered the unwise and unprecedented re- 
striction relative to the succession, passed a canon giving 
all future assistant bishops who should be elected the 


riii;lil ot siui'cssioiK \\ lurciipon the iu\l \'ii-L5iiii;i ('oiivcii- 
liou ri|)c;ili(l Ihc ri'sliiclion imposed upon the election of 
Hisliop. iiiul i'Mvi' him llu- rii^lil ol" siicccssioii. Tlu' labors 
of lii.slio|) Moore were, however, unabated, and at every 
('convention lie had the satisfaction of re|)ortin^ the pro- 
gress and development of his diocese. In one of his ad- 
dresses he reported that of the lifty-six clergymen belong- 
ing to the Diocese in 1833 not kss than forty-fom- had 
been ordained bv him. 

DiocES.\N Institutions Esr.\BLiSHED. 

During his Episco])ate of twenty-seven years he had 
the satisfaction of seeing a number of Diocesan institu- 
tions and organizations established which have continued 
to help and bless the Church which he so deeply loved 
and so faithfully served. 

In 1816 a society was formed for the distribution of 
Prayer Books and religious tracts. 

At the Convention a fund was established for the suj)- 
port of the Episcopate. 

In 1818 the Education Society was organized in 
(leorgetown, D. C, and subsequently was transferred to 
Virginia, and was nourished and fostered by his interest 
and unfaltering co-operation. In 1835 it was re])orted by 
the Secretary of the Society that '"nearly one-tenth of the 
clergy in the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United 
States have in whole or in part been assisted by this soci- 
ety. One-sixth of the present clergy of Ohio, one-eighth of 
those of Pennsylvania, one-fifth of those of Maryland, and 
a large j)roj)ortion of those in \'^irginia have derived aid 
from its funds, while it is now affording assistance to 
about one-seventh of all the students in the several theo- 
logical schools of the Church in the I'nited Stales." In 
addition to all this the Education Society contributed 
from its funds money to aid in |)urchasing the |)resent 


site of the Theological Soniiiiary in Virginia and paid in 
full the salary of the Rev. Dr. Lippitt, who was appointed 
to the Chair of Systematic Theology in 1825. 

In 1829 the Diocesan Missionary Society was formally 
established, and its constitution adopted. This action was 
the culmination of efforts which had been made for the 
support of diocesan missionaries dating back as far as the 
Convention of 1813. (Hawks' Journals, p. 90.) 

At this Convention a Committee was also appointed 
to take into consideration the laws and regulations for 
the government of the society for the relief of distressed 
widows and orphans of deceased clergymen. 

The Bishop had also given his support to the estab- 
lishment of the Southern Churchman, which he cordially 
endorsed and commended in his Convention address of 
1835. The Institution, however, in which he took the most 
vital interest, and to which he gave his most earnest and 
devoted support, was the Theological Seminary, which 
began its life just at the time when he began his work as 
Bishop of Virginia. Of this institution further mention 
will be made in closing, as it constitutes the most potent 
and vital memorial of his Episcopate. 

Conbcntion ^bbresigeg 
anb Virginia Cf)urc!) Contentions! 

His last addresses to his Convention glow with the 
fervor of nuitured atfection, and with the devotion to the 
evangelical faith which constituted the unfailing theme 
of his preaching. In tender tones he urged his clergy to 
"Labour with diligence in the vineyard of your Master 
and be not weary in well doing. Be faitliful unto death 
and God will give you a crown of life." To the laity 
he said : 

"My brethren of the laity, accept my sincere thanks 


lor llu- |);ili()ii;i.i4c you have ixttiidi'd lo myscll and ((► 
llu' ol('i\t!iv. I'lic h'.pisoopal (".luiii-li in \'ii\i*inia, wliicli 
was almost hrcalhlcss and t-xpii-ini^ a lew yrai's since, lias 
nol onlv r(\i\cd, but, thiouijih \\\v goodness of (lod on our 
joint cn'oits. now cxhihits aniniation and slicni^tli. In- 
stead of live or six ellicient clei\^ynuu, the AlniiifJity lias 
inereased our nunii)ers to between lilty and sixty. "Not 
unto us. () Lord, not unto us, but to liiy name be the praise, 
lor thy honour and lor thy ti-utlTs sake." Since my resi- 
dence in this diocese, the laity belouifin^ to our commun- 
iou have erected between thirty and forty new churches, 
and have raised from a slate of ruin and dila|)i<lati()n at 
least thirty of the old i)laces oT worship. We have reason 
to be Ihankl'ul I'oi" what (lod hath done lor us, and lo take 
courage and i)ress forward. My brethren oi" the clergy 
and laity, I commend you to the care of that being in 
whose service you are engaged. May you long live to see 
our Zion increase in stature, under the ministry of my 
Right Hev. brother. Bishop Meade. My gray hairs point 
to the tomb. My frequent and violent attacks of disease 
remind me of my ])roximity to the grave, and proclaim 
to me, in language I perfectly understand, that we must 
soon shake hands and bid each other farewell. But let 
that event take place sooner or later, my heart is com- 
forted with the hope that 1 shall leave you in safe hands; 
in the care of an individual who is in the vigour of life; 
who loves you, and will labour hard to i)romote your pres- 
ent and everlasting happiness. My blessing shall rest up- 
on his head; and the welfare of himself, of the clergy 
and people of the diocese, will form one of the objects of 
my last earthly suj)j)lications." 

These old Conventions of the Diocese of Virginia 
were uni([ue in the history of our Church in America. 
Thither came the |)eo|)le from far and near, as the tribes 
came uj) to .lerusalein lo the great feasts of the Temple. 
Writing to invite liishop Kavenscroft, of North Carolina, 
to endeavoi- to be j)resent at the (^onvenlion soon lo meet 
in Petersburg, he mentions the fact that there had been at 
least twelve hundred visitors at the Convention which met 


the previous year in Frederieksbiirg. Of these old Vir- 
ginia Conventions a contemporaneous historian writes 
as follows: 

"A Virginia Convention! There is something to ani- 
mate and warm the heart in the very title! When we 
speak of most other Diocesan Conventions, we think of 
assemblages of the clergy and \i\y delegates, with the Bish- 
op at their head, convened chietly for the purpose of at- 
tending to ecclesiastical business — of regulating the fiscal 
and other ordinary interests of the diocese. But how^ dif- 
ferent the impression made upon the mind when a Vir- 
ginia Convention is spoken of! The annual ecclesiastical 
meetings of that diocese have but little of a secular char- 
acter connected with them ! Business is but a secondary 
and subordinate matter. The assembly is not limited to 
the elected members, but is a gathering together of the de- 
voted friends of the Church, clerical and lay, from all 
parts of the state, not excepting the more distant and re- 
mote parishes. Persons of all ranks and ages — 'young 
men and maidens, old men and children' — are gathered 
together for the purpose of religious improvement and 
spiritual edification. It is such a scene as was exhibited 
among God's people of old, at their solemn festivals, as 
described in the words of the Psalmist, 'I was glad when 
they said unto me, we will go into the house of the Lord. 
Our feet shall stand in thy gates, O Jerusalem. Jerusalem 
is built as a city that is at unity in itself. For thither the 
tribes go up, even the tribes of the Lord, to testify unto 
Israel, to give thanks unto the name of the Lord.' 

"In the midst of the hallowed and interesting scenes 
of that annual festival, the Bishop moved as the presiding 
genius. He was the centre of attraction and unity to the 
numerous family of devoted and affectionate children by 
which he was surrounded. He was a leader or partici- 
pator in the numerous devotional services which took 
place day after day, and night after night. His heart 
glowed with the kindled fervours of faith and love; his 
eyes sparkled under the inspiration of hope and joy; and 
his tongue flowed with melting elo([uence, as now he 


iiriii'd his miiiisliTs to i;i-i;il(i- Z(;il ;in<l r.iilliriiliicss, mikI 
tlun txlioilcd llic |)(()|)U' lo i(|)iiil;iiR'f and a lioly lii'c, 
'riu'sc annual (",()n\ inlions were lo him souicts of nnai- 
fcctod ploasnrc and dilii^hl. As. aniidsl llusc limes ol" 
n rrcshinif, he ht luld the word oi" (lod taking effect upon 
the hearts and eonseieiiees oT tlu- peojjle, and witnessed 
answers lo prayei- in the conversion of sinners, lie rose to 
higher and higher degrees of enjoyment, lill. as the end 
drew neai-. it seemed as if he were in a raptnre or ecstacy; 
JLisl ready, like Klijah, to go up in a chariot of lire to 
heaven! Never have we witnessed a spectacle which so 
nearly answered to our idea of the purity, and joy, and 
love of the ])riniitive Church, as the closing scene of a 
Virginia Convention. When the hody of weeping clergy 
gathered aronnd the altar, while, in the presence of a 
crowded hut i)raying assend)ly, their Right Reverend 
Father in God, with shaking hands and whitened locks, 
stood before them as an appropriate representative and 
successor of the Apostles — and, with streaming eyes, and 
a voice tremulous with emotion, gave them his parting 
counsels, and pronounced over them his affectionate fare- 
well — a scene was presented upon which attending angels 
might gaze with rapture." 

dTftc Cloging Cbentg of ?|i£S episcopate 

In 1840 the Hishop journeyed to Raltimore to assist 
in the Consecration oi the Kev. Dr. Whittingham to the 
Episcopate in Maryland, and also went to Philadcdphia 
to ordain his kinsman. Rev. (i. T. Bedell, to the Diaconate. 
Responding to an urgent invitation he went to Westches- 
ter, X. v., in August, 1841, to ordain Mr. Bedell to the 
Priesthood, and was assisted in the service by two of his 
own sons. It is interesting to note that though the Bishop 
was seventy-nine years of age, he look an active i)art in 
an Association which Rev. Mr. Redell had arranged in his 


Parish co-incident witli his ordination, and spoke with 
great earnestness and spiritual ])ower tour times in addi- 
tion to conducting the examination for orders, celebrating 
the Holy Connnunion and taking the ordination service. 
Following the sermon by Dr. Tyng at the evening service. 
Bishop Moore made a touching appeal for personal conse- 
cration. "I shall never forget," wrote Rev. Mr. Bedell, 
"how the old man, eloquent, stood that evening on the 
border of the grave, his white locks, and his uplifted, 
trembling finger, telling of experienced age, but in the 
cause of Christ forgetting every weakness of the flesh, one 
finger only resting on the chancel rail, his whole frame 
roused by the energy of his mind and active under the 
influence of his feelings. How impressively he told us 
of the Savior whom he had served for fifty years and so 

bade us hear an old man's testimony. The tears of 

not a few persons in the audience showed the power of his 
eloquence, among them being an old soldier of the revolu- 
tion who said afterwards that he had not shed a tear be- 
fore for many years." 

While in New York Bishop Moore attended the ses- 
sion of the General Convention and lent his voice and in- 
fluence to the project of appointing two bishops, one for 
Texas and the other for West Africa. This was his last 
service to the General Church. Leaving New York be- 
fore the adjournment of the Convention he returned to 
Richmond, and tw o days after commenced, in his eightieth 
year, a journey of a hundred and fifty miles to Lynchburg, 
arriving there on the 5th of November, where, after speak- 
ing at an evening service previous to a confirmation ser- 
vice which was to take place on the following day, he was 
taken ill and died of pneumonia in the home of Rev. 
Thomas Atkinson, Rector of St. Paul's, on the 11th day of 
November, 1841. His death was mourned throughout the 
whole Church. His body was carried back to Richmond, 
w^here the last tributes of devotion were paid to his hal- 
lowed memory, not alone by the bereaved members of his 
Church, but by the whole community. 


Ovtr liis uiiMNc tlu- Wslrv ol' Moiiimiciit;!! Cluirch 
crccli'd ;i moiumuiil which ht-ars the roUowinL* inscrip- 
tion : 


Was liOHN IX Tin: Cn\ oi Ni;w Youk, 
August 21st, 17()2." 

"Hi-: lahourki) i aithfullv and successmlly in 

thii ministry of the 

Protestant-Episcopal Church 54 years." 

"He was rector of the Monumental Church 

IN Rk:hmoni), 

And Rishop of the Diocese of Virginia, 

27 YEARS." 

"In the Convention that called him to the 


There were only 7 members." 

"At the time of his death there were 95 
clergy in the Diocese of Va." 

"He died in Lynchhurg, Virginia, 

Nov. 11th, 1841, 

At the age of 79." 


or this iiioiiimient Rev. Dr. Heiishaw gives this de- 
scription : 

"On the opposite side of this monument is an inscrip- 
tion commemorative of Mrs. Moore. At the base of the 
pyramid, on the east side, is sculptured in bas-relief, a 
cross, over a portion of which some drapery is hung, and 
on the opposite side an altar; on the northern side there 
is a representation of a Bible with the following inscrip- 
tion engraved thereon : 

"Daniel, Chapter XII." 
"They that be wise shall shine as the brightness 





"And on the opposite side a Prayer-Book is repre- 
sented with this inscription: 

'In the midst of life, we are in death.' " 


E\)t iBcginniugfii of tfje 
^Ijeological ^eminarp in Virginia 

This Inslilulioii, w liosc hcifimiiiii^s were coiilciiipo- 
raiH'oiis with the Ijoifimiing of llic Kj)iscopalc of Bisliop 
Moore, is tlu' most vital and potint iiuniorial of his minis- 
try. It is something dinicull to say just what point marks 
the hcgiuning of the Thook)gical Seminary in Virginia, 
and it would hv unfair to others to name any one man 
as exelusively entitled to he designated as its founder. 
This School of the Prophets is the child of faith and 
devotion of many sons of the Church. Laymen, Clergy- 
men, and Bishops united in the dreams and as])irations 
out of which it was born, and co-operated in laying its 
foundation stones. Rev. W. H. Meade, who was chiefly 
instrumental, with Dr. Wilmer, in bringing Bishoi) Moore 
to Virginia, who gave to his Episc()])ate such constant 
and devoted support, and who saw before the coming 
of Bishop Moore the vision of the Virginia Church, lifted 
from the ruins into which she had fallen and made strong 
and glorious, was perhaps the most active and efficient 
agent in promoting the establishment of the Seminary 
in Virginia. This is unquestionably the opinion held by 
Bishop Johns. 

To this Institution, however, Bishoj) Moore gave his 
earnest and constant endorsement and sup])ort. The fol- 
lowing brief annals of its early history are therefore giv- 
en, as they fall within the time of Bishop Moore's Episco- 
pal supervision : 

In the fall of 1814 Rev. Dr. John Augustine Smith, 
President of the College of William and Mary, met Bishop 
Moore on the street in New York, and suggested to him 
that a Chair of Theology be estal)lished in the College at 
Williamsbui'g. This sugg(>stion marks the beginning of 
the Theological Seminary in Virginia. 

When in 1815 a communication was received from 
the President of the College of William and Mary, sug- 
gesting the expediency of establishing a theological pro- 
fessorshij) in that institution, he gave the suggestion en- 
thusiastic support in his address to the Convention. 


At the Convention of 1821 it was determined to es- 
tablish a Theological Department at the College of Wil- 
liam and Mary, and a Board of Trustees was elected to 
have charge of the undertaking, and Mr. John Nelson was 
appointed to solicit subscriptions throughout the Diocese 
for the purpose. To the Convention of 1822 it was re- 
ported that .$10,268.3,3 liad been secured; a constitution 
for the Theological School was adopted, and Rev. Dr. W. 
H. Wilmer was elected as first President of the Board of 
Trustees. To the devoted interest of Rev. Dr. Wilmer 
the Seminary owes a debt of gratitude and appreciation 
which has not, up to this time, been generally recognized 
and accorded. No man in the Church in Virginia had 
the Seminary nearer to his heart, and no one labored 
more zealously than he to promote its welfare. 

The Trustees reported to the Convention of 1823 that 
they had selected and appointed the Rev. Mr. Keith Profes- 
sor of Divinity in the College of William and Mary. 
In 1823 the Theological School was moved to Alexan- 
dria, where, in October, Dr. Keith, who had only one 
student to offer for instruction in Williamsburg, now 
took up the work of theological instruction with a class 
of fourteen students, thirteen of whom were candidates 
for orders. To the Convention of 1825 the Board reported 
a detailed course of theological study, and the rules and 
regulations which had been adopted for the government 
of the school. To the Convention of 1826 the Board re- 
ported the death of Rev. Prof. Norris and the election of 
Rev. Mr. Lippit as Professor in the school. Twenty stu- 
dents are reported, seven of whom were soon to be or- 
dained. To the Convention of 1827 the Board reported 
that they had "determined to purchase or erect in some 
healthy situation near Alexandria, but in the State of 
Virginia, a house or houses sufficiently large to accommo- 
date two professors and twenty students." In 1828 it was 
reported that the property, consisting of sixty-two acres 
and a brick house where the Seminary now stands, had 
been purchased, in June, 1827, at a cost of five thousand 
dollars, and that three thousand dollars additional had 
been expended in erecting a three-story brick building. 


It \v;is I'lirlluT rcixnUd llial il li;i(l Itccii round (li;il st-v- 
enty-livc dolhirs wms ;im|)l\- siitliiiciil lor the hoiird of 
each oT llu' scvi'iilcTii sliidciils ciii-ollcd. 'ilicrc is. how- 
ever. IK) rc-port oil this suhjcc-l Iroin the slii(Uiits. They, 
liowevcr. siir\i\ i-d. and Ihcir siu'ccssors have coiiliniicd lo 
survive, llioui^h eomphiinls are perhaps heai'd more ol'leii 
of material limitations in thesi- modern days than in the 
more Spartan days of old. Still through days of trial and 
through such j)eri()ds of ])i-()S])erity as have eome to her, 
the dear old Seminary has still kept lo the even tenor of 
her way. From her halls have gone forth consecrated 
men to witness to the truth hoth "in Jerusalem and Sa- 
maria and unto the uttermost parts of the earth." True 
to the Master's commission to teach the great Gospel of 
the one great Mediator, and loyal to His connnand: "Go 
yc into all the world" and "tell it out among the nations 
that the Lord is King;" constant in her faith that it is "not 
hy human might or power," hut hy the Spirit's henedic- 
tion that the witness is to he given to the presence and 
power of the living Christ, she has been instrumental in 
bringing many sons into the glory of the life redeemed 
by Him Who loved us and gave Himself for us. 

The future calls us. From a world bound by the gold- 
en chains of materialism; from cities where industrial 
strife abounds because men know not in what the abun- 
dance of a jnan's life consisteth; from colleges where 
much learning has made men mind-mad, but left them 
spiritually blind; frf)m homes where luxiuw is enervating 
the souls of men, and distorting the mental vision of 
3^outh; from social and philanthropic institutions where, 
as never before, it is coming to be seen that humanitarian- 
ism is impotent to nourish the innnortal spirits of men; 
from the materialism of rationalistic and ritualistic ec- 
clcsiasticism; from every source where men are needed 
for leadership who have themselves seen in the silent 
place the vision of the all-suftlcient Christ, and who have 
heard the voice of the Spirit, and been consecrated by the 
power, there comes the call for men to teach and preach 
the truth that makes men free, and minister the Sacra- 
ments that men may be made clean and strong to help 


finish tlie great unfuiislied work ol" (iod's great unfinished 
world. To our Seminary comes this call at this time. 
The call is very clear. If true to the faith in which she 
was horn, the Seminary will never die while the Church 
is militant for truth and righteousness upon the earth. 

May the God of our fathers continue to hless this school 
of the prophets that Christ may be glorified with the glory 
w^hich shall be revealed. 

Read at the Theological Seminary in Virginia, 
Alumni Association, June 4, 191^^^. 


Ut. Ui:v. Wiijja.m Cabkll Brown, D. D. 
Bishop Coadjutor oi VnuiixiA 


t!rf)e iEigfjt J^eberenb 

WiHiam CafatU S^roton, ®. ®. 

As announced by the writer when this address was 
ordered published by the Alumni Association of the Theo- 
logical Seminary in Virginia, it is with deep at!'ection and 
sincere regard dedicated to him who, one hundred years 
from the consecration of Bishop Moore on May 18th, 1814, 
was on the 14th of Mny, 1914, elected Bishop Coadjutor 
of the Diocese of Virginia. 

The Bt. Bev. William Cabell Brown, D. D., was born 
in Lynchburg. Virginia, on November 22nd, 1861. He was 
the son of Bobert and Margaret (Cabell) Brown, and is 
closely connected with many of the oldest families in the 
State. His boyhood was spent in Nelson County, near the 
once famous Norwood School which he attended for many 
years. He taught for several years in the public schools 
of Nelson County, Va., commencing this work when he 
was sixteen. In 1881 he became a teacher at the Episco- 
pal High School, and for one session studied law at the 
University of Virginia. He graduated at the Theological 
Seminary of Virginia in 1891 and was ordained deacon 
by Bishop Whittle on June 26th in the Seminary Chapel, 
and priest in (irace Church, Berryville, Va., on August 
2nd of the same year. Immediately afterwards, on Sep- 
tember 13th, 1891, he went with the Bev. Mr. Meem to 
Brazil, joining the Bev. Messrs. Morris and Kiusolving, 
the pioneer missionaries of our Church in South America, 
who had gone out two years before. His remarkable 
work in that country as missionary, theological teacher 
and translator of the Prayer Book and Bible is well 
known. In 1901 he was elected Missionary Bishop of 
Porto Bico, and in 1913 Missionary Bishop of Cuba, but 
declined in both cases, feeling it his duty to remain in 
Brazil until tlie important work which he had in hand 
should be accomplisiied. Dr. Brown was elected Bishop 
Coadjutor of Virginia in St. James' Church, Bichmond, 


\';i., on May 20lh. I'.M I. Jiisl two days alU-r Ihf one liun- 
(Iri'dlh anniversary ol the consecration oi" I^isiio]) Moore 
on May 18th, 181 ll 

Vhv lollowinif account ol the Consecration of Bisiiop 
Brow II is taken ironi the Southern Churchman ol' October 
;5(ltli. 1!)1 I: 

Consecration of ISigfjop IL^robun 

The consecration ol the Rev. William Cabell Hrown, 
1). I)., as Hishop Coadjutor ol' the Diocese of Virginia, took 
place in St. James' Church, Uichmond, on Wednesday, 
October 28th, the Feast of St. Simon and St. Jude. Morn- 
ing Prayer was said in the church at liall'-j)ast nine o'clock 
by the Hev. .1. J. Cravatt, D. D., and the Rev. J. Y. Down- 
man, D. D. 

At eleven o'clock tlic procession of choir, clergy and 
bishops ])assed from the parish house by the front doors 
into the Church, singing the processional hymn 311. 
There were about sixty vested clergymen in the proces- 
sion. They were followed by the Bishop-elect with his 
attending presbyters, the Rev. Berryman (Ireen, D. D., and 
the Rev. James W. Morris, D. D., and the Bishops in order, 
the Bight Bev. Arthur S. Lloyd, D. D., president of the 
Board of Missions; the Bt. Bev. Beverley 1). Tucker, D. D., 
Bishop Coadjutor of Southern Virginia; the Bt. Bev. Wil- 
liam Loyall (Iravatt, 1). D., Bishop Coadjutor of West 
Virginia; the Bt. Bev. Lucien Lee Kinsolving, 1). 1)., Bishop 
of Southern Brazil; the Bt. Bev. Alfred M. Bandolph, I). 
D., Bishop of Southern Virginia; the Bt. Bev. Bobert A. 
(iibson, D. 1)., Bishoj) of Virginia, and the Bt. Bev. Daniel 
S. Tuttlc, D. D., Bishop of Missouri, and Presiding Bishop. 

The Ante-Communion service was said by the Pre- 
siding Bishop, the Epistle being read by the Bt. Bev. 
Bishop Bandolph. and the (lospel by the Bt. Bev. Bishop 

Hymn number 586 was sung. 

The sermon was preached by the Rt. Rev. Lucien Lee 
Kinsolving, 1). D., Bishop of Southern Brazil, from the 
text, P»omans 1 : 1 — "Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called 
to be an apostle, sej)arated unto the Gospel of Cod." 


It was an cIo([iieiit discourse and worthy of the oc- 
casion. His charge to the Bishop-elect, for twenty-three 
years his fellow-worker in the mission field of Brazil, 
was especiall}'^ tender and appropriate. 

Dr. Brown was then presented for consecration hy the 
Rt. Rev. William Loyall Gravatt, D. D., Bishop Coadjutor 
of West Virginia, and the Rt. Rev. Beverley D. Tucker, 
D. D., Bishop Coadjutor of Southern Virginia. The cer- 
tificate of his election was read by the Rev. Edward L. 
(loodwin, D. D.. Secretary of the Council of the Diocese; 
the testimonial signed by the members of the Council by 
Mr. Rosewell Page; the certificate of his ordination to the 
diaconate and priesthood by the Rev. William D. Smith, 
D. D.; the statement of the canonical grounds of his elec- 
tion by Mr. John M. Taylor; the certificate that all canoni- 
cal requirements had been met by the Rev. H. B. Lee, 
D. D. ; the consents of the Standing Committees by the 
Rev. William J. Morton; and the consents of the Bishops 
by the Rt. Rev. Arthur S. Lloyd, D. D. The Bishop-elect 
made the promise of conformity in a firm voice. The 
Litany was said by the Rev. Ernest Stires, Rector of St. 
Thomas' Church, New York. 

The Presiding Bishop then proceeded with the exami- 
nation of the candidate and the consecration ])roper. Rt. 
Rev. Bishops Gibson and Randolph were consecrators. 

All the Bishops present united in the solemn imposi- 
tion of hands. The Holy Communion service was taken 
by the Presiding Bishop, who also pronounced the bene- 
diction. The offertory was for the Diocesan Missionary 

The Recessional Hymn was 249. 

The service throughout was a beautiful and stately 
one. The music was appropriate and admirably ren- 
dered. The church was filled to overflowing with a de- 
vout congregation. The Rev. Thomas C. Darst, Rector 
of St. James, was the master of ceremonies, and much was 
due to his careful arrangement of every detail. 

To the regret of everyone Bishoj) Peterkin, of West 
Virginia, who had been appointed one of the consecrators, 
was unable to be present. 


The ("liiiixli iiKiy lirl very sure lluil llic hisloric posi- 
tion ol tlu' Dioci'si' oi" Virifinia, and hvv Initlil'ul wilncss 
to the I iiiulaiiu'ntMl and t'sstntial i)rinc'ipk's of tlic ^roat 
(lospil of ri(lc'nii)ti()n will hv strcngthcni'd through the 
intlniiuc and ])rc'aching of him who. with the honored 
Hishoj) ol X'ii'ifinia, is charged with the responsibility of 
high service in this ancient diocese ol' the Church of (lod 



Los Angeles 
This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. 



5995 The Right- Rev- 

■ l['{(}6 ereria^Richard" 

Cnanning Moore 


AA 000 835 212 2 


' J*-- 



k wi 

.^: .